United Kingdom prepares to give first COVID-19 Vaccinations

Article Link

           It's finally here, Britain is beginning to prepare the release of the first doses of a COVID-19 vaccination. It's been confirmed that England had already received their allocation of the vaccine and it is currently in the process of being distributed. The vaccine is known as the Pfizer/BioNTech vaccine and UK health officials expect to have up to four million doses of it. The Pfizer/BioNTech is said to offer up to 95 percent protection against COVID-19 and by the end of December it will be available to anyone. As of right now, over 40 million doses of the vaccine has been purchased by the government which is enough to vaccinate 20 million people in total which is a third of the entire United Kingdom population. Benefits will come with the UK being the first to lay hands on the vaccine because more deaths from COVID have been recorded in the UK than anywhere else in Europe. The Pfizer vaccine doses are stored in freezers at minus 70 degrees celsius. Only specific freezers are capable of such temperatures. After taken out of the freezer, the MHRA authorization requires the doses to be refrigerated and used within five days. The first doses arrived in the UK on Thursday night. The UK Joint Committee on Vaccination and Immunisation suggest that the vaccine should be given to older patients and staff first. People over 80 years old would take it first because they are more at risk at death to the virus rather than younger humans. But, according to the head of UK's Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA) June Raine tells the British Broadcasting Corporation "You might have a mild symptom but it will probably disappear in a day or two, and nothing at all of a serious nature." June Raine makes it clear that symptoms may occur but it won't be too severe or dangerous. The MHRA explains that one in ten recipients may receive pain at the injection site, headache, muscle pain, chills, joint pain and possibly a fever.

        Personally, I believe that the Pfizer/BioNTech vaccine is a good idea. Despite the symptoms, the vaccine is apparently 95 percent protective against COVID-19 and they have produced millions of doses already. Even then, the symptoms aren't life threatening at all. One in ten people may receive symptoms which isn't a risky odd but nonetheless, theres no danger to the patient. The Pfizer does have its challenges, they are meant to be kept in 70 degree celsius cooling areas. The containers that they are kept in are special and not many hospitals have access to them. It's definitely a challenge but with a lot of cooperation and communication, it could work and end up successful. We also need to keep in mind that the longer we wait for a perfect virus to come out, the more time we give for the COVID-19 death counter to go up. Therefore, I believe the Pfizer could help facilitate all problems we have right now.

Questions:

1) What are your thoughts on the Pfizer?

2) Are the odds of the Pfizer symptoms too risky?

3) Do you agree that staff and older individuals deserve first dibs on the vaccine?

What Happens Next for DACA's Dreamers

 In June of 2012, Barack Obama announced and established the DACA (Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals) immigration policy. The DACA program would provide undocumented immigrants under the age of 16 who are currently in school with a high school diploma or GED and have no criminal record a “permit” that would allow its recipients a renewable two-year period of deferred action from deportation and the legal ability to work in the US. In 2015, Obama proposed expanding DACA to protect the undocumented parents of children that were US citizens, an action that was widely unpopular among states and was blocked by the Supreme Court. Then, when the Trump administration assumed office, they decided to terminate DACA in 2017. After examining the situation more closely, the Supreme Court ruled that the DACA program was unconstitutional in 2018 but allowed it to remain in place. However, those who did not have DACA would not be able to apply for the program’s protection. 

Since the DACA program has been created, it has faced many legal challenges and still does so today. Most recently, Judge Nicholas G. Garaufis from the District Court in Brooklyn reversed an act approved by the acting secretary of Homeland Security that restricted new applicants from participating in the program. Garaufis’ decision has been met with much opposition, particularly from the department of Homeland Security, stating that they believe that his ruling was made rashly and not on a legal basis. But for undocumented immigrants, there doesn’t seem to be much hope. Later this month, a federal judge in Texas is expected to rule in favor of conservative states to terminate the DACA program. This issue has also created a large challenge for the Biden Administration. Biden has already vowed to reverse Trump’s immigration policies and protect the DACA program, but he will be met with much opposition. If Biden decides to pass an executive order to protect the DACA program, the order will likely be blocked by conservative states such as Texas and Mississippi, just like Obama’s proposal to expand the DACA program to more undocumented immigrants. 

Personally, I believe that the DACA program should be kept. For 18 year old Ms. Morales, this means she can pursue her goal of having a career in criminal justice, and for Ms. Perez, this means she can get her law degree. The program has helped as much as 800,000 young Dreamers secure better educational and financial opportunities, and for many it means the ability to pursue their dreams like going to college. However, I also think that the DACA program isn’t enough. If I were in a situation where I had to reapply every two years to a program in order to stay in my home, continue going to school, and continue going to work, I would be overwhelmed with so much uncertainty and fear. That being said, the DACA program is only temporary. I strongly believe that we need to adopt a permanent order like one similar to the Dream Act to give Dreamers protection from being deported and a path to U.S. citizenship. 

Article Link

1. What is your opinion on the DACA program? Do you think that it should be kept, reformed, or eliminated? Why? 

2. Do you think that the government should pass a permanent act to ensure that undocumented immigrants can stay in the U.S. and become a U.S. citizen? Why or why not? 

3. With the political and legal turmoil that has surrounded this issue, what do you think will happen when the Biden assumes office? Do you think he’ll be able to keep his promise regarding protecting the DACA program? Why?

The Elderly vs. Essential Workers: Who Should Get the Coronavirus Vaccine First?

 

Article Link 

As we get closer and closer to having a COVID-19 vaccine available for the public, the C.D.C. will soon be deciding who to recommend as a priority in receiving this limited initial supply of the vaccine. The groups that are most vulnerable to the virus are seniors and those with underlying conditions. On the other hand, people who work in necessary facilities and businesses, from hospitals to grocery stores, are on the front lines and interact with tons of people every day. Though it’s ultimately up to governors and state officials to decide, this discussion is a difficult one all around and I don’t think there’s really a perfect solution to this.  

The choice mainly comes down to whether the goal is preventing deaths or slowing the spread of the virus– both of which are obviously important, and there are many factors that complicate the matter. Prioritizing essential workers would curb the rate of infection, but in the U.S. around 70% of workers are deemed essential workers, making the definition of “essential” even more confusing. This group ranges from food and healthcare workers to educators, engineers, exterminators, and countless other people. It’s unlikely that there will be enough of the vaccine for this entire group, so the decision of which workers should be vaccinated first also needs to be made. Alternatively, if the goal is to extend human lives then that would mean vaccinating older Americans first at the expense of reducing the rate of infection and being able to return to some sense of normalcy. A committee of medical experts that advises the C.D.C. will soon vote on who to recommend for the second phase of vaccination. In a meeting last month, all voting members of the committee showed more support for essential workers rather than those 65+ and those with high-risk health conditions.

Personally, I think that vaccinating some members of different groups would be both effective and a way to reduce overall damage in the long run. I’m sure many essential workers are also immunocompromised and/or are older, making them more vulnerable. There are also higher infection rates amongst low-income people/workers, so they should be considered too. Emergency responders and healthcare workers (and in general those who interact with the public on a regular basis) should also be prioritized. But overall, it’s terrible that a choice has to be made on who is more “essential” and which groups should be preserved over others.

1. Who should be the first to receive a vaccine? Is there a successful way to vaccinate some members of a certain group but not others?

2. How do you define “essential workers”?

3. Is the income of a family/individual a valid aspect to consider when determining who should be first to be vaccinated?

As Pandemic Threatens Britain’s Mental Health, These ‘Fishermen’ Fight Back

Article Link

The COVID-19 pandemic has taken its toll on communities across the globe. With people being socially isolated, stressed, lonely, and financially insecure, people's pre-existing mental health conditions are worsening. A lack of human connection is also leading to depression and suicide. In Gainsborough, England, a mental health charity called the Bearded Fishermen is stepping up for their community. Volunteers work with emergency responders to monitor known suicide hot spots in the area through their "Night Watch" suicide prevention initiative, as well as respond to mental health calls at residents' homes. It's uplifting to see people actively acknowledging and helping those who are struggling with mental health issues. I think it's paramount for there to be more consistent awareness about mental health and suicide prevention during this pandemic because recognizing that there are resources to help lets people understand that suicide is not inevitable. In communities, schools play a big role, even while we're learning virtually. Having kind, helpful counselors and teachers, as well as easy access to helpful resources and support online, can make a huge difference in a person's outlook on life. I believe the more frequently mental health and suicide is talked about, the less stigma there is about using those resources to ask for help. 

What's your reaction to this article?

Do you think there needs to be more consistent awareness about mental health and suicide prevention during this pandemic? 

How do you think communities in the United States can provide socially distanced outreach and support to those struggling with their mental health? 

Five Bay Area counties to enact strict stay-at-home order ahead of state edict, starting Sunday

 

    Starting Sunday at 10 p.m, a stay at home order will be issued by direct order of Gavin Newsom, the Governor of California. This will force the major counties in the Bay Area, San Francisco, Marin, Santa Clara, Contra Costa and Alameda counties to shut down all outdoor dining, personal care services and entertainment locations. This means that gyms, movie theaters, zoos and other possible super-spreader environments will be shut down with only the essential businesses operating at a lowered capacity. This would force restaurants to do takeout and delivery along with grocery stores operating at 20% capacity. The reason for this order is based upon the availability of ICU beds. 

    The statewide order issued depended on ICUs dropping to 15% of available beds, however this order came early at the fear of a "dark Covid winter" dropping the amount of available care even further. Currently, the counties are averaging around a 25% ICU bed availability with the most drastic being 14% in Santa Clara. Director of the San Francisco Department of Public Health Grant Colfax claims that "We need urgent intervention now to dent the trajectory of this surge." Many regions in California hold true to Dr. Colfax's statement as hospitalizations hit a record high every single day. This would see counties such as Santa Clara, losing all available ICU beds. This stay-at-home order is going to take place over the course of a month, attempting to limit the spread of the virus until a vaccine can be distributed to boost the fight against it. With the holiday season approaching, many have already thought about traveling and this stay-at-home order, according to many, is untimely. 

    My personal opinion on this is that this stay-at-home order is the absolute correct thing to do. Regardless of holiday traditions, visiting family or socializing with friends, a lockdown needs to be in order as a new record of Covid-19 highs are being hit everyday. Simply being outside, masked or not, puts people at risk and in order to limit this, strict orders have to be instated. This isn't a "normal" time so normal traditions should be put on hold until us, as a people, can make it out of this war without so many casualties. I'm not saying to throw away Christmas, but to celebrate as a family, because being alive, not needing to fight for every single breath of air is the ultimate gift for this holiday season, regardless of what we usually have. 

1. What is your opinion on this state order? Is it too harsh? Not harsh enough?

2. What will the impact of this be on the economy? Is it worth it to shut a large portion of it down?

3. With this statewide stay-at-home order in place, do you think we should return to school following the winter break?

Article Link

Los Angeles Police Just Banned The Use Of Commercial Facial Recognition

https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/briannasacks/lapd-banned-commercial-facial-recognition-clearview

Facial Recognition software such as Clearview AI have created a lot of controversy over the proper regulations and usage for the program. Clearview AI uses facial recognition technology to gather images off of social media platforms, and saves them in their database, even after the picture is deleted online. Some say this is a breach of privacy, but Clearview AI claims that this technology is only meant to be used to help law enforcement solve crime such as shoplifting or identity theft. 

However, the LAPD (Los Angeles Police Department) has decided to temporarily prohibit the use of Clearview AI, after the program was used by officials who were not authorized access to it. It was reported in March that over 2,200 "law enforcement departments, government agencies, and private companies across 27 countries" had used Clearview AI, many of which did not have professional agreements with Clearview AI, and were able to experiment with the technology as a "free trial." Clearview AI was also found to tell officers to "run wild" with the technology and test it out on friends and family. They granted access to "political allies, Republican lawmakers, and entities in countries with questionable human rights records." The officers who use Clearview AI refuse to say what they use the software for, and whether or not they have actually made any arrests through using it, which is what Clearview claims it was intended for. The LAPD does use another facial recognition program called LACRIS, but LACRIS only takes photos such as mugshots and booking photos, not pictures off social media. 

Personally, I find it somewhat scary that Clearview can access so many pictures online. It's not limited to what I post, but what others post too. I agree with most people who call it "creepy," although I don't think it's a breach of security since these pictures are on the internet already. Though I can't use it, it's kind of interesting to think that on their database there are pictures of me that I don't even know are on the internet, such as a stranger catching my face in their YouTube video. I think this technology is very advanced and has a lot of potential, but it can also be easily abused and maybe hijacked by people who are not allowed access to it. 

Do you think Clearview AI is doing more harm than good? What else could Clearview be used for? 

Who do you think should be able to use Clearview AI? What rules would there be to ensure security?

‘It Has to Stop’: Georgia Election Official Lashes Trump

 

As the senate runoff elections in Georgia which could turn the senate to a blue majority are gaining traction and publicity by many, there is also a lot of input by members of the Government. In Georgia, there have been many threats of violence recently against overseers of elections, and it is becoming very nerve wracking to these officials. Gabriel Sterling, Georgia's voting system implementation manager spoke out very strongly against these threats and how President Trump is contributing to them. President Trump has not condemned the threats or violence against these officials, and Mr. Sterling, at a conference at his state's capitol stated: "It has to stop, Mr. President, you have not condemned these actions or this language." He then went on to say that these were elections, the backbone of democracy, and anyone who has not stepped in is complicit. Threats had been made not only against Sterling, but against many Georgia officials and their families, and Sterling, at the conference stated: "Stop inspiring people to commit potential acts of violence. Someone is going to get hurt, someone is going to get shot, someone is going to get killed. And it’s not right.”

A lot of these threats began when President Trump refused to concede, and still believes that he won Georgia. While he does not condemn these threats, he is still lashing out at anyone and everyone who states that he did in fact lose Georgia, including Georgia's own Governor, Brian Kemp, a Trump supporter himself. He is also tweeting many strong messages that contain a lot of misinformation, claiming that the entire election was a fraud and that he won by a landslide. Recounts are taking place in Georgia of votes, but while all of this is happening, many officials in charge of overseeing this process are being virtually and physically harassed and threatened.

In my opinion, I believe that all citizens should respect the democratic process. It seems to be a compromise that every American should be able to live with, since President Trump won the election through this process in 2016 even without the popular vote. When President-elect Biden won the 2020 election with the largest number of votes in any election, it should seem obvious to both parties who the winner of the election was. Many people might not agree with the electoral college either, and I don't believe it is fair for many reasons, but in 2016 the election was won by the electoral college so it's confusing that many people don't accept this in 2020. I also believe that there should never be a threat to any person's safety, and no matter what political party someone aligns with, it's important to respect their safety and to condemn anyone who puts them in a state of fear.

Discussion Questions

1. Do you believe that President Trump's silence on the issue of threats to Georgia officials is justified? Why might he stay silent when overseers of a pressing issue to him are being threatened?

2. Do you think Trump's refusal to accept the results of the election could result in violence, or do you think that these threats are the extent of the conflict we will be seeing?

3. What is your opinion on the democratic process we currently hold (electoral college vs. popular vote, etc.) and why do you think many people, especially Trump supporters are claiming that it's rigged in 2020, but didn't in 2016? Do you believe that we should only take the popular vote when declaring the president?

Source: https://www.nytimes.com/2020/12/01/us/politics/georgia-election-trump.html 

U.S. Health Officials Warn Thanksgiving Travelers They Could Seed a Surge on Top of a Surge

    

   

        Health officials have urged Thanksgiving travelers to quarantine themselves after holiday travel, to help stop the rapid rise in COVID cases. Despite the forecast ten percent drop in travel by AAA, the decrease is significantly smaller compared to the 47.8 million people who ended up traveling. These numbers are cause for concern due to the increase in recent weeks of the number of COVID cases by twelve percent, especially in California where over 100, 000 cases have been reported in a single week. Holiday travelers can further increase these numbers due to the asymptomatic transmission, as COVID symptoms do not manifest until after two weeks of the contraction. However, many have disregarded these precautions due to the news of expected vaccinations for COVID. In fact, a spike in the number of travel bookings for Thanksgiving occurred days after it was revealed that the Pfizer vaccine, still in testing, was around 90 percent effective. On the other hand, the steps taken by many to cancel plans of travel during the holidays has definitely helped prevent a surge in COVID cases.

        Personally, I believe that non-essential traveling during the holidays, despite news of potential vaccines, is dangerous especially through crowded airports. I agree with health officials that people should be aware of the risk of exposure to COVID if they travel, and should refrain from doing extra activities that might infect others. In addition, throughout the holidays people should still follow the precautions of mask-wearing and social distancing until a vaccine is officially approved by the FDA. 

 

Questions:

1)What are your thoughts on traveling during the holidays in this pandemic?

2)What would you say to those who had to cancel plans to spend the holidays with their family?

3)What do you think of the people who undertook non-essential travel in spite of health officials’ warnings?

4)Were your plans for Thanksgiving canceled?

 

https://www.nytimes.com/live/2020/11/29/world/covid-19-coronavirus?action=click&module=Top%20Stories&pgtype=Homepage

https://www.nytimes.com/live/2020/11/24/world/covid-19-coronavirus?action=click&module=Top%20Stories&pgtype=Homepage

Completed Wisconsin recount confirms Biden’s win over Trump

 AP News

CNN 

Sunday (11/29): Wisconsin's Dane County completed a ballot recount of the state's presidential votes, as requested by President Trump - a negligible 45 votes were gained for Trump due to the recount. With an earlier recount in Milwaukee County granting 132 votes to President-elect Joe Biden, a net 87 votes were added to Biden's favor in the state, providing a fairly trivial reassurance of Biden's victory. 

    However, the POTUS and his legal team continue to deny Biden's victory, claiming voter fraud in the form of illegal ballots despite the failure of such claims to hold ground in other states such as Arizona and Georgia. His attorneys filed complaints citing alleged widespread fraud, and Trump himself continued his antidemocratic rhetoric in a recent interview on Fox News with conspiratorial rantings of a "well-coordinated attack" on the election proceedings. 

Although the election results are not yet officially certified in Wisconsin by the bipartisan Wisconsin Election Commission, it's clear among experts and the official count that there is no evidence of widespread fraud - why then, is President Trump attempting to overturn the vote?

    Trump is not a politician - he was and is a businessman. From his stay in the Oval Office, it is clear from his conduct he holds no respect to the traditions of the office. He does not place particular importance on the smooth transition of power, but instead seeks to get ahead by riding his populist wave. I don't believe that Trump's approach is a direct threat to our democracy, as our nation has survived far worse - the polarization of the election of 1800, the sedition acts, even the Civil War: we have always been disjointed on political issues. 

However, I think that increasing American polarization itself and the popular support for Trump's rhetoric is a byproduct of an already failing democratic system. The historic two-party system resulting from our first past the post (FPP) system of voting, for one, dissatisfies a majority of people every election cycle because of FPP's tendency to drift towards two broad parties. I think steps should be made to move towards instant-runoff voting (IRV) in order to encourage multiple parties in American democracy, which would offset the polarization between two clearly defined sides and allow trust to be rebuilt in our systems once again because more representative options are available.

San Mateo County and Others Join Purple Tier

 

The Sacramento Bee

San Mateo County News

    Due to a rapid increase in coronavirus cases from October to November, San Mateo, Calaveras, San Francisco, Plumas and Modoc counties moved into the purple tier, the most restrictive coronavirus regulation tier, on Nov. 29. Marin County is now the only Bay Area county that is below the purple tier as they are currently one tier below, in red. 

    Purple-tier counties are required to shut down non-essential indoor businesses such as indoor-only restaurants, places of worship, gyms, movie theaters, zoos, aquariums and museums. Furthermore, all retail stores will only allow 25% capacity and gatherings can only happen outside with no more than three different households together, still following social distancing protocols.

    San Mateo County and San Francisco County will also have to comply with Gov. Newsom’s 10 p.m. to 5 a.m. curfew starting Nov. 30 at 10 p.m. and potentially ending on Dec. 21. This means that residents are only allowed to leave their houses between these times for essential activities or jobs.

    It’s hard to see that coronavirus cases are rising again and I think the movement into the purple tier is very justified but I’m not quite clear on how the curfew will help. I understand it’s to try to help limit exposure, but I don’t think many people are going out and risking exposure between 10 p.m. and 5 a.m. I’m not sure how effective it’s going to be and if it’s really necessary.

Discussion Questions:

1. What do you think about the curfew?

2. Which restrictions do you think will be the most or least effective and why?

3. Do you think San Mateo County is handling the coronavirus the best it can? What can it do better?

Diversity in Biden's Cabinet

 

   Even though the presidential transition process isn't going smoothly as possible, President-elect Biden is preparing for his administration as inauguration day approaches. Biden has already selected several nominees and more are coming. The president-elect is planning to nominated Janet Yellen as Treasury secretary, who if nominated would be the first woman to hold the treasury position. Alejandro Mayorkas, who if nominated would be the first Latino immigrant to be the leader of the Department of Homeland Security. Avril Haines, who if nominated would be the first woman to direct National Intelligence. And finally, John Kerry, who would assist Biden tackle climate change. Some of them might be familiar faces: Mayorkas previously served as deputy secretary of the Department of Homeland Security, Haines previously served as a top CIA official and security adviser during the Obama administration, Janet Yellen was recruited to become an economist with the Federal Reserve Board of Governors, and John Kerry helped negotiate the Paris climate accord in 2015. These nominees are expected to be nominated into these positions, and Biden is selecting more for his Cabinet. 

   Since it was just Thanksgiving and we've learned much about Native Americans, I also want to include that a Native American has a chance of being selected for Biden's Cabinet. Representative Deb Haaland, a New Mexico Democrat and is a member of Laguna Pueblo, has a chance of becoming the secretary of interior. Native Americans have been urging Biden to pick her and if he does, it would be a historical moment for the Native Americans.

   Meanwhile, Trump is questioning Biden forming a Cabinet and claiming that the election is still not yet over in a tweet.

   Personally, I like what Biden is doing and I think diversity is always good to cover a wider range of perspectives and ideas, more representation is especially important as these are powerful positions that may have direct influence over our lives. Overall these nominees seem experienced to me and I think they will fit into their positions nicely. Even though these are just a few first picks and many more will be selected, Biden's cabinet is looking very solid and reliable, I will have high expectations for his future picks.

1. What are your first thoughts on Biden's picks? 

2. Is a diverse cabinet good? What are some pros and cons(if any con)?

3. Do the nominees seem qualified for their position? Expectation on future picks?

NYT article

AP article

The NFL’s Thanksgiving Weekend Has Become a Covid Crisis

Washington Post Article Link: 

        Since the beginning of the pandemic back in the Spring, major adjustments across all industries and professions have had to be made. For sports, the Covid-19 pandemic initially led to cancellation all across the board: from little league, high school, collegiate, and all the way to the professional level, teams and players across the U.S. and world had their seasons called off entirely. However, with increasing knowledge of the virus and likewise how to prevent its spread, leagues began to re-start their seasons with major changes, one of the most apparent being the lack of fans. Specifically, efforts such as elevated safety procedures, testing protocols, and strict protective equipment requirements have allowed professional athletes to get back to work, unfortunately however, not without major risk and consequence. These past few weeks in the U.S. have been absolutely devastating in terms of the increase in Covid-19 spread, and this increase is reflected clearly in the NFL, which in September averaged about six cases a week and now averages around 54. A highly anticipated Thanksgiving game scheduled for this past Thursday between the Steelers and Ravens got cancelled due to 20 players on the Ravens alone being placed on Covid-19 reserve list (they either have it or have been in contact with someone who has). Despite cases being identified, the league did not have a single cancellation or schedule change due to the virus for its entire first month after resuming, and we can now see how harmful that has been. 

        With the Steelers vs. Ravens game first being postponed to Sunday and then Tuesday, I believe that it is a ridiculously short amount of time to delay a game where so many players risk spreading the virus to others, and who let alone may not be in the condition to play. Earlier outbreaks such as when eight players on the Titans tested positive in a week should have been wake up calls, especially in terms of rescheduling games with a long enough time in between the original and new date to ensure that players and staff members can isolate for the timeline established, and then be tested to ensure that they can't still spread the virus and are okay themselves. The reluctance to take appropriate action in the face of risk such as Covid-19 exposure highlights that despite the efforts being made to ensure safety, that there is still business to be done and money to be made, and that requires games to happen. I think therefore that there is too much pressure from league leaders to proceed with games that should be cancelled in actuality. This begs the question then of whether or not it is reasonable to resume sports, especially a contact sport with no possibilities for distancing, and which has not been managing the safety of athletes and staff well. 

        - Should professional sports be sidelined for the time being? 

        - What further actions need to be taken by leagues and teams to ensure the safety of all players, coaches, trainers, medical staff, etc? 

        - What is your reaction to the NFL carrying on with their season despite outbreaks which  occur repeatedly? Are they handling their situation responsibly? 

    

The Thanksgiving Myth Gets a Deeper Look This Year

 Article link

Not to say the US has completely reconciled it's brutal past of slavery, but we are further along coming to terms with it than with how America treated Native Americans. This article reminds me of Frederick Douglass' speech "What the slave is the 4th of July?" Well, what to a Native American is Thanksgiving? (The phrase "Takesgiving" from the article was both funny and shocking.) Seeing a holiday from a different perspective is fascinating to me. Now I still plan to celebrate the 4th of July and Thanksgiving, but I also plan to spread truth to cure the myth of both holidays, both in my family and in my lessons. What's your reaction to the article? How do you come to terms with Thanksgivings or other holidays that sugarcoat the past?

Trump courts Michigan GOP leaders in bid to overturn election he lost

 

The case of Overturn in Michigan

Georgias Recount

    As the Elections ended and the final Numbers came through, Joseph Robinette Biden has been declared our president-elect and is to be inaugurated on January 20th as our 46th president. However, due to the supposed miscount of ballots in the state of Michigan, President Donald Trump is trying to overturn elections in several states including Michigan and Georgia, who did a recount of their votes to reaffirm that Biden had won. It is my strong opinion that so far, we have had 43 different presidents who have willingly given up their power to another following president, and it is my hope that we will continue this through to the end. It is also my opinion that whatever Our president decides to do about his power, he will end up leaving the presidential office and Our new president will be in. 

    The basic reasoning around why Donald Trump is doing this in the first place however lies within his defeat to the electoral college. As most of you know, the electoral college is made up of 538 electors who decide who our next president shall be. After a while, they will come up with a rough bunch of votes with the candidate with the most votes winning the election. There have been large calls to remove the electoral college, however, due to it sometimes disagreeing with the popular vote. Something to note is Faithless electors, these are people who promise to vote for someone when appointed but vote for someone else for different reasons. as of 2016, there have been around 165 cases of faithless voting, and 63 of which were during the case of Horace Greeley, where he died after election day but before the electoral college convened. This can also be seen in the election of 2016, where president trump had won the electoral vote but lost the popular vote. A big point of this as stated in the article is in the case of Donald Trump's reelection is when His lawyer, Rudy Giuliani said that Gop state legislatures in battleground states Biden won should try to use a delay in certification to appoint their own slate of electors and ignore states' popular votes for Biden.

• Do you think that Michigan can make a substantial difference in the election currently?
• What are your views on our current President's ideas on his presidency and what he is willing to do to keep his power. Do you think that he would really go through with it or is it just a stunt?

Firearm purchases have increased drastically due to recent events

 There's no question that this year 2020 has been a very hectic year. This has naturally changed how people act and behave and one of them most concerning changes is the increasing purchase of firearms. This year firearm purchases have increased to unprecedented levels. Increased firearm purchases during and after times of unrest or predictions of restrictions are not a new thing.  Such as after Obama calling for more restrictions on firearm sales in 2013 after the sandy hook shooting which increased sales by nearly 1 million in that year.  However this is one the first times in recent history where firearm sales have increased despite no new gun restrictions threatening gun ownership with the major reason of firearm sales increasing being to defend oneself with all the unrest from covid-19, and protests. Unfortunately due to the election results being relatively new there isn't new data that shows if the election has had an effect on firearms purchases, but with the president elect Joe Biden surely taking an anti-gun policy into office there will most likely be more firearms being purchased for the months to come. I for one do not own a firearm, but I have known people that do own firearms, and from discussions with them I feel as most gun owners are responsible people that understand proper firearm safety. However this kind of panic buying in amid a pandemic and unrest does have me concerned that there will be many people who buy firearms that are not responsible which may lead to many preventable gun deaths.  However I do think there is an argument to be made here that since most people are buying guns in 2020 to either defend themselves or their property in a time of unrest they are exercising their 2nd amendment in a way that it was intended which is true, but already with so much tension in the air a few more mistakes and the unrest could only multiply. 

Three million more guns: The Spring 2020 spike in firearm sales (brookings.edu)

Questions to consider 

1. How do you think Joe Biden will respond to gun control and sales when he takes office?

2. Are you concerned that with the increasing purchasing of firearms will lead to another mass shooting? 

3. Do you agree that people should be able to quickly purchase firearms in times of unrest? why or why not.

How a David and a Goliath Sprinted Ahead in the Vaccine Race

 

NYT Article

Washington Post Article

    

    As we approach the end of 2020, we get closer and closer to the distribution of a working coronavirus vaccine. Two companies, Moderna and Pfizer, have been locked in a race to produce said vaccine first. Not more than two weeks ago, Pfizer and its German partner, BioNTech, reported that their coronavirus vaccine proved to be over 90 percent effective on November 9. A week later, Moderna reported its coronavirus vaccine was 95 percent effective. Pending FDA approval, we could be seeing vaccine distribution as early as December.
    How did the race get so close? The answer lies in Operation Warp Speed. Warp Speed intended to create three kinds of vaccines, with two companies pursuing each kind of vaccine at once. Moderna and Pfizer were to pursue the mRNA vaccine. Moderna, a much smaller company, welcomed help from the government and was granted the money and assistance it needed to get the clinical trial for its vaccine up and running. Government aid also allowed it to overcome various transportation issues, speeding up the process, and allowing it to meet certain deadlines on time. Pfizer, one of the world's top vaccine producers, did not need any government assistance and tried to stay out of the political aspect of creating a vaccine. In the end, both companies were able to create a working vaccine in a matter of months, rather than in the years that it would normally take.
    I think that this is great news. With two vaccines, both over 90 percent effective, to be distributed relatively soon, we could see many more people receive a vaccine than if there was just one available. I think the competitive aspect of vaccine development was also a likely factor in how quickly they were created. With any luck, we may have a semi-normal year in 2021.

• What do you think was the biggest influence on how quickly the vaccines were developed (urgency of the issue, wanting to be first to distribute a vaccine, political influence, etc.)?
• Do you think having two teams working "against" each other to create a vaccine is more harmful or helpful? Would having one larger team be more effective?

America Is Letting the Coronavirus Rage Through Prisons

 article link : https://www.nytimes.com/2020/11/21/opinion/sunday/coronavirus-prisons-jails.html?action=click&auth=login-google&module=Opinion&pgtype=Homepage

While COVID is being watched precariously in most states throughout the country, the American prison system has been neglected from safety precautions and measurements. COVID has ravaged throughout prisons across the country at exorbitant rates. During the week of Nov. 17, The Marshall Project, a non-profit for criminal justice, reported that there were 13,657 new cases in the federal and state prisons. There has been little social distancing or mask wearing in the prison facilities which are often overcrowded and overpopulated.To make matters worse, the prison system has a high percentage of inmates with pre-existing conditions, making them more susceptible to severe COVID symptoms. The numbers don’t lie, as of mid-November almost 200,000 cases of COVID have been reported in state and federal prisons. Cases among prisoners are reported 4 times as high as those of the American general population, and the death rate more than twice as high. Prison staff have also been widely affected by the spiking rates in prisons, with their infection rates being 3 times as high as the public as well. On top of this, prison facilities are often outdated and overcrowded, kinds of conditions that help COVID spread easily. Just north, across the SF Bay, San Quentin is one of the many prisons across the country that has had high rates of outbreak. In mid-July, the prison had active cases exceeding 1600. The conditions of San Quentin were called into question, with overcrowding, outdated facilities, and few medical personnel, tents had to be set up to house the sick. The lack of attention brought to contain the outbreak caused backlash and the case was eventually sent to court in October, where it was ruled that the prison had to reduce its population to half capacity. While this may have addressed one prison’s handling of COVID, other prisons have yet to change their inefficient and often inhumane methods of handling the outbreaks.

In my opinion, it is absolutely unacceptable to have such little regulation throughout the prison system. Inmates are subject to major safety concerns which could be handled in an appropriate way. The disregard given to prisoners' health is shocking to me, as they are still human beings and should be treated with respect. The outbreaks of COVID have also shed light on the conditions in our prison system which I believe are in need of change and improvement. It is especially shocking that prisons so close to us, like San Quentin, still have horrific conditions, even while being in a state that is so focused on providing quality healthcare. 

What is your reaction to the COVID situation in prisons?

How do you think the outbreaks in prisons should be handled? (ie. population cutdowns, new safety regulations, updating facilities)

The Decline in Tourism During Covid-19

 

Since the beginning of the coronavirus pandemic, tourism, a leading engine for large city economies, has continued to fall. Recent projections have shown that New York City will not return to its pre-pandemic totals until 2021. This decline in tourism has affected major industries, as hotels, entertainment, and restaurants often rely on tourist activity as the primary source of income. As a result, thousands of Americans have become unemployed, many of which are without college degrees, adding difficulties to finding employment elsewhere. With the rising numbers, New York City has remained cautious by regulating visitor movement; many sites are limited to 1/3 of their pre-pandemic capacity. Additionally, the city has issued temporary housing for 9500 homeless in order to provide relief and prevent further crowding.

Given the current circumstances, I think New York City has taken the correct approach regarding tourism. Regulating movement is essential in order to mitigate the spread of coronavirus. In my opinion, taking strict precautions now will allow a faster recovery to pre-pandemic conditions. Opening tourism wholly, will only increase unemployment long term. Furthermore, given the results of our presidential election, New York's approach aligns with the direction our country will likely take.

Do you think New York City is taking the right approach regarding tourism? Should they be taking more or less precautions?

Do you think travel and tourism will change even after a vaccine is found?

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/11/16/nyregion/nyc-tourism-covid.html?action=click&module=Top%20Stories&pgtype=Homepage

The US Surpasses 11 Million Cases of Coronavirus

People lining up for coronavirus tests outside Dodgers Stadium

Article Link

The US is reaching scary-high levels of coronavirus outbreak, with more than 1 in 400 Americans having tested positive. This recent surge started in mid-October, going from 8-9 million cases in two weeks and 9-10 million cases in 10 days. Additionally, there has been an upwards trend in 48 states, with California recently joining Texas in surpassing one million cases. 4 new states set death records on Saturday: Montana, Oklahoma, Wyoming, and South Dakota. Amidst all this, I think the most uprising thing to come from the pandemic thus far is its effect on different races. Statistics show that Hispanic and Latino people have been hospitalized at 4.2x the rate of whites, American Indian people have been hospitalized at 4.1x the rate of whites, and Blacks have been hospitalized at 3.9x the rate of whites. Coronavirus has been a major factor in our lives and has affected the way we socialize greatly, ie. opting for zooms or facetimes instead of being with friends in person. However, in New York, though cases continue to rise, schools remain open.  

1. Should New York go back into lockdown and close its schools?

2. Why do you think that certain people of color have been hospitalized at such high rates as compared to white people?

3. Why has there been a recent surge in coronavirus cases?

Pandemic Speeds Americans’ Embrace of Digital Commerce

article link

    The internet is quite an amazing place that has allowed for so many innovations and connections in the modern world. The internet and computers have been the catalyst for many discoveries and it continues to alter daily life of people and social norms. This is especially true with the introduction of the COVID-19 Virus to our daily lives and changing our routines as well. If this pandemic were to happen prior to the widespread of the internet and the advancements in technology, it would not have been handled nearly as well as it is right now. The internet has allowed us to adapt our daily lives and change our way of life because of the pandemic. A great example is school right now. We are currently doing online school from our homes. Needless to say, without the internet this would be impossible. The internet has also helped in other areas. The essentials that people need can now be gotten without having any personal interaction to reduce the spread of the virus. Services like door dash and other services that deliver goods and groceries to your home without contact has served to ease the anxiety of many and reduced the spread of the virus. The modern age of technology and the internet is the saving grace for our generations in this pandemic that seems to encompass our entire world and daily life.

1. What are some ways that the internet has positively impacted you in this pandemic that you are thankful for?

2. To what extent do you think that the internet has eased the minds of the general population or benefitted the well being of others?

3. What are some other ways that the internet has helped to influence people during the pandemic?

Poll: 70 percent of Republicans don’t think the election was free and fair

 Article Link

The divide over mail in ballots seems to have been made worse by hyper-partisanship. According to a poll of 1,987 voters, 70% of Republicans felt the election was not free and fair, and of that percentage, 78% felt mail-in ballots led to widespread fraud (which is an unsubstantiated theory the president has been pushing). In contrast, 90% of Democrats believe the election was free and fair.

I found this story interesting because it exemplifies the consequences of Trump's rhetoric. For instance, the slogan, count all "legal" votes, falsely implies that illegal votes are being counted, and casts doubt on the election, which makes it damaging rhetoric to put forth. I am also troubled by the willingness of some Congress members and other Trump supporters to support false claims, though some Republican Congresspeople like Mitt Romney have condemned him. I am concerned that even after Trump is removed from office, his views will shape the Republican party.

I find hyper-partisanship and how divided the nation to be worrisome trends, which can undermine the foundations of democracy in America.

Questions:

1. How do you feel about the election?

2. How can the spread of misinformation, like false claims about the election be limited? What actions should social media platforms/individuals/public officials take? 

3.  Should Republicans continue to back Trump's claims or should they try to distance themselves from him?

4. How will a lack of faith in the election impact a transition to a Biden presidency?

5. Do you believe bipartisanship is still possible? How would it become possible?

6. How can we maintain trust in our democracy?

Trump's Refuses to Back Down From Reelection

Article Link

           While Trump was out playing golf, Biden was announced as the winner of the 2020 presidential election. However, instead of the traditional congratulations to the winner or concession speech, he claimed that voter fraud must be taking place and that the election was "far from over". This led to many, including his own aides, to fear that he will not concede peacefully, and his associates have even come out to say that Trump is unlikely to formally concede under any circumstances. Trump's accusation of fraud votes has led him to question the integrity of election results and use legal action to block the completion of the counting of votes. He had spent months trying to discredit mail-in voting and has used the counts in Pennsylvania, Arizona, and Georgia as false evidence to back up his claim. He has sued the states of Pennsylvania, Nevada, Georgia, and Michigan and has requested a recount in Wisconsin and Georgia as well. Public officials have said that there is no evidence of fraud that would affect the votes, and that they were in the middle of investigating any claims.

        On Saturday, he clearly expressed his opinion in his tweet, "I WON THIS ELECTION, BY A LOT!" after all the major news organizations announced Biden as the winning candidate. Some of his aides have announced that they were hoping to convince him to a public transition as peacefully as possible by Inauguration Day (January 20), but others warn that the turnover will not be the smooth transition it has been in the past.

        I believe that Trump is not acting as professionally as he should be as the now former president of the United States. There has been no evidence to suggest that any fraud was present, but he still insists on recounting and accusing states that had had narrow margins in their counts. I don't think this will reflect nicely on America as a nation, and I hope that all accusations will be resolved as quickly and peacefully as possible.

Do you think Trump's claims of voter fraud are valid? 

What do you think will happen during the transition between president to president?

Biden to announce coronavirus task force as part of presidential transition

 

Article Link

Second Article Link

    Throughout his presidential campaign, Joe Biden pledged to take COVID-19 seriously. Just days into his presidential transition, he will take the first steps in keeping that promise. Unlike our previous president, Biden acknowledges the threat that the coronavirus presents against America. Biden will be announcing a 12-person coronavirus task force on Monday. This task force is meant to prove how seriously Biden plans to reduce the threat. With coronavirus hitting a record number of daily infections, Biden plans to focus on this urgent matter before it gets worse.

    Biden is trying to bring back attention towards the virus, after being shadowed over by the elections. The president-elect is taking the same mindset that he and former President Barack Obama, had when they devoted themselves to the economy when they were elected 12 years ago, and bringing back that mindset towards COVID-19. Biden wants to fight for mandating masks across the country in all public areas. With finding a safe vaccine being expected by early December, but mass production sufficient for everyone coming several month into 2021, Biden does not want to allow the situation to worsen. Mandating mask wearing in all public areas across the country would certainly minimize infections, but in order to mandate people to wear masks, they must enforce it. With some people believing that masks are not necessary, it makes enforcing masks much more difficult. If people do not acknowledge the threat of the coronavirus, then enforcing masks will cause more of a problem. Personally, I believe masks are not an absolute solution to coronavirus, but they certainly mitigate the spread of it. Biden focusing on COVID-19 shows his priority on keeping the American people safe, which in my opinion should always be the number one goal for any president.

Do you think Biden is taking COVID-19 too seriously, and should be focusing on other situations?

Is mandating mask wearing a viable solution to prevent coronavirus from spreading?

Will mandating masks only cause more problems for America?